Printable View
Test it for yourself. See what happens when a unit of peasants attacks a unit of spear militia on the Grassy Plain map. Or try to send a unit of billmen into a cavalry unit. Apart from the initial charge, the billmen will cause absolutely no casualties to the cavalry unit, even if the billmen have 9 experience and you're fighting Hobilars or Scottish Border Cavalry.Quote:
Originally Posted by King Jeron
Read the factinos involved. I suspect that the bottom of the map will be where the Maya are. That is it doesn't go any farther south than Venezuela and Columbia. Tricky to include the Inca under those cercumstances.Quote:
Originally Posted by Filibustería
Please keep discussion on topic
yeh i kept forgetting to mention that. the inca empire made the aztecs look like telatubbies. shame that there is no mention of that war. since cortes conquered them trying to find eldorodo? i think thats how its spelled.Quote:
Originally Posted by Filibustería
Pizarro you mean. And he had to push 100's of kilometers into Terraincogneta just to reach an Incan out post.
me didnt have my books opened. 8P
Inca aren't on the map, it's pretty much only the Caribbean and a bit of North America.
Anyways, I'm sure I'll enjoy the mini campaigns far more than the actual Grand Campaign. I'm usually bored with that after conquering 25 provinces (which doesn't take too long, let me tell you) because I know I basically have won...
So, I'm looking forward to this expansion, if the CA guys do it properly, this will become the best expansion they released so far (although I admit to not having played Mongol Invasion - but then again I haven't played STW, either)
How easy it is to make people happy ! Give them some new units , flamethrowers and some campaigns and they are enlighted. Nothing what modders can not do by themselves.
What I'm really hoping for are new gameplay elements to change Rommedieval into a real medieval experience. Still waiting for Dynasties, Heraldic system, medieval interactive dynamic events (Hunts, Claims...) as for example in the Anno Domini mod. If not, it's just a repeating of boring battles in a different costume...
Up to now i can see only the glamour but not the beef !
repman
Frankly I prefer flamethrowers to hunting rabbits.
this is glorious!!!
With this expansion, I could finally live my dream of slaughtering and pillaging Indians.
I have to agree with repman a bit. While battles are nice, what I appreciate most is immersion. I want to believe that when I am playing a medieval game, that I really am in the Middle Ages. Medieval: Total War did this quite nicely for me. The sequel, however, I find slightly lacking. But it is still an amazing game despite that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Filibustería
From the looks of it, the Americas campaign will be based around the Valley of Mexico and environs. That would place the Inca, the Mapuche, the Florida tribes, and the Carib well off map. More appropriate than any of those, and far more accurate than the Apaches, would be the Zapotecs or the Mixtecs. The Zapotecs in particular were a significant player in the region.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenicetus
The idea of four smaller campaigns seems pretty cool, just hope this also includes the end to all those infuriating bugs in the original grand campaign, and maybe somewhat less stupid AI diplomacy, at least the spaniards are gonna need that if the americas campaign is going to be remotely realistic.
also, I really hope this expands the grand campaign somewhat too, some new units for all factions, inclusion of the MP units that were omitted from the grand campaign, and a couple of new factions and new provinces.
IMHO the ability to control multiple armies including reinforcements was the feat that surprised me the most. The way the sentence is written I got the impression that you will be able to control even your allies armies beside your own reinforcements. This will really spice up my playstyle since I usually deploy two armies together in an campaign, one offensive and one defensive.
More epic battles, yahooooo!
:yes:
I presume that that feature was included in order to make the 'alliance' campaigns more realistic and immersive; now we've just got to hope it's carried over into the main campaign.
maybe they will work on the americas map some more before release.
and you cannot have byzantine flamethroweres without the da vinci steam tank and steam cannon and his infamous rotating blade assault chariot.
https://i155.photobucket.com/albums/.../tankrepro.jpghttps://i155.photobucket.com/albums/...rnet/tank2.jpghttps://i155.photobucket.com/albums/...t/steamgun.jpg
https://i155.photobucket.com/albums/...cicondotta.jpg
That last bit looks like it'd cause more damage to the horses driving it than anyone else.
Personally, I think madchat is on to something with his laser armed terminator cohorts. I'd also like to see the inclusion of several lances of various clan and star league era mechs as elephant replacements. ~:thumb:
Info posted by Caliban at TWC:
Quote:
Kingdoms Expansion isn't finished yet, but its well on its way. The testers here are already playing through the campaigns and giving us some really positive feedback.
The patch is due out very soon and will be out well before the expansion.
These are definitely abilities and not 'special powers'. We wanted to expand on the general’s influence to give different characters abilities that compliment their personalities. You should see more detailed information about the different abilities soon.
The Control multiple armies feature is extremely cool. This lets you send orders to the generals of the reinforcement armies to carry out commands. You can select the armies via the 'army tabs'. I was watching Palamedes control 6 reinforcement armies in a siege battle last week! Very cool stuff.
I finally got my hands on the copy of GameStar to dig through the facts collected there. Man I love living in Germany!
First, I would like to point everyone reading this thread to the following link where you can find some more screenshots from the AddOn:
http://www.gamestar.de/aktuell/scree..._kingdoms.html
Second, I would like to add some of the things I gathered from reading the GameStar article that have not been mentioned yet.
The major drawback that the Preview mentions concerning the AddOn is that many features contained in the four scenarios will not be available in the original M2:TW. For example the forts with moats can only be built in certain scenarios and you won't be able to control AI reinforcements in the original campaign.
Let's come to the new additions though for each scenario:
Eastern Europe:
Faith will play a huge role in this campaign as the Teutonic Knights will only be able to train their best units in catholic settlements. This means they will have to put a lot of effort into converting.
On the other hand pagan or orthodox factions like Novgorod or Lithuania can convert to Catholicism. This can lead to riots but gives them access to more advanced weapons. It also has the drawback that the Teutonic Order can immediately pump out it's best units should they conquer one of your towns.
The Danes have other goals, they are bent on uniting Scandinavia which will give them access to special norwegian warriors.
While the HRE will have to try to secure vital trading posts to boost the Hanse in the Baltic Sea.
Crusade:
Important towns and cities like Jerusalem will offer unique bonuses to the faction that controls it and enable you to recruit elite units. You will also receive steady reinforcements from the settlement.
There will be Holy Relics that you can find in victorious battles or in conquered cities. You can assign those Relics to one of your generals. After his death it will be given to his successors. Relics can be lost to the enemy if you loose a battle.
New World:
If you start as the Spaniards, you can gain Presitge points that will let you raise in rank from mere Noble to Marquis. Every rank will give you more money and give you access to more advanced troops. You can also be demoted if you loose too many battles.
The Spaniards will not only have to subdue the Indians but later in the game they also have to defend their possesions against French and English colonists.
The Indian tribes can ally with the Spaniards and gain Musketeers and other advanced units through it. They also have the option to sacrifice prisoners to their Gods to make their populace happier.
Britain:
In this scenario you will see a large and strong Britain that has to fight against the Welsh, Irish and Scots on all fronts, while having to fight inner squabble as well.
The Norwegians will be raiding against all parties present on the British Isles.
I hope you found the above information helpful. I'm only passing it on from what I read in the GameStar magazine so don't hold me responsible for any of it. Have fun!
Cheers!
Ituralde
And a TW blog with info no the general abilities:
http://www.totalwarblog.com/Quote:
First off – hello. I’m Mark Sutherns, I work at CA UK in the Studio Marketing department and hopefully, you’ll be seeing a lot more of me on this very blog and on the forum in the months ahead. Enough of the introduction though, let’s get down to business.
I wanted to make a post to follow up on some of the comments and threads I’ve read on the Medieval II forum since the announcement of Kingdoms. In particular, I wanted to post some more info on the heroes and special abilities feature to give you some more detail and perhaps put some people’s minds at rest. I would have posted on this before now, but I wanted to get some additional info from the dev team in Oz and with the time difference...well you know. Anyway, enough of the rambling excuses, here's the beef on heroes and abilities.
Firstly heroes have been added to Kingdoms in order to reflect the role that certain significant leaders played in battle. Up until now in Total War, you've developed your own Generals, their traits and command abilities but with Kingdoms we wanted to take that a step further by giving the player unique General characters that came equipped with improved abilities in battle. These special abilities reflect the influence that these great leaders of men had on their troops and their potential to turn the battle in the favour of their armies.
By giving these heroes increased abilities, it makes these particular Generals even more precious, therefore introducing new strategies concerning how these heroes are used in terms of where they are deployed on the campaign map and which battles they are thrown into.
The special abilities included in Kingdoms (we’ll reveal more detail on these in the weeks and months ahead) will be limited to one per hero and will be carefully balanced so, while they have an influence on the battle, they are not so powerful as to unbalance things dramatically. Typically these powers will be limited to morale effects on your own troops and in some cases, the morale of enemy troops. As you'll see when you get to play Kingdoms, these abilities make these heroes significant to the campaign game so that the player you’re driven to keep them alive and to use them strategically at the right time and in the right battles within the campaign.
To give you even more detail, Dan Lehtonen, a designer on Kingdoms from our studio in Brisbane, sent me this overnight:
“The one ability that seems to have spooked a lot of people is the Byzantine politics ability. This unfortunately prompted by an inaccurate translation from the Gamestar magazine preview in which it was thought that enemy units would be made to fight against other enemy units, when in fact they cause a ruckus throughout their own unit, causing a distraction and holding that unit up. This can provide many tactical opportunities on the battlefield with possible flanks being opened or vital units being held up by infighting.
Manuel’s ability represents the skill and cunning use of Byzantine agents’ provocateur. These men slip into an enemy army before battle and bribe greedy members of enemy units to start a ruckus when given a signal from the Byzantines. They do not kill anyone in their own unit! Because if they did and the battle is won by their army they would be strung up as murderers! Of course Manuel has promised through his agents that they will be spared if they lose… There is no magic at work here, just capitalizing on pure human greed.”
So there you go. I hope this sheds some more light on this particular feature. More will become clear when we reveal each of the heroes and their particular abilities in a month or so. In the meantime, keep the feedback coming and I’ll endeavour to keep you updated with extra snippets of information and detail up until release.
:furious3:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ituralde
Times 80 hojillion... C'mon, that's just crap CA. We've been chomping at the bit for this feature since STW, and now we finally get it but we can ONLY play it in a few small campaigns? This must be what it's like to buy a sports car and find out you can only drive it at 35 mph in stop and go traffic.Quote:
Originally Posted by TinCow
:no:
My guess is so that those who don't get the expansion can still get update 3 patch without it being several gb in size and featuring things others have to pay for. I mean BI didn't add anything to RTW, apart from a few things that could be modded in.
:yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by TinCow
Aye, it shouldn't be a big deal to mod most of that stuff into the grand campaign.
But, if it is not a big deal for the modders, it is a lot easier for CA. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by alpaca
That´s a feature the player are looking for, CA knows that and are going to use on the new exp. Why not use in the main campaign?
Sometimes I think we are being too kind if the companies, as if they are doing us a favor just making the game. Why spend money to play it and its not a big deal to wait for the best CA could do, not the best the modderes could do.
Just my toughts.
Fabiano
well mech commander 2 did somewhat of a decent job of what you are talking about. but still it would be awesome to see battle mechs going through a wormhole and appearing on the medieval battlefield although im sure it would be one sided unless they had to take on timurid cannon elephants.Quote:
Originally Posted by Whacker
we would have to take the terminators guns away from them since when they travel through time displacement they cant take mechanical devices with them. so they would have to go catch some knights and soldiers and relieve them of their attire and duke it out with pole arms and swords.
also a zombie army would be neat as well but they would have to show arms and legs getting hacked off for that.
it would be neat instead of wardogs you had to fight a bunch of war wolves or in other words and interpretation ware wolves.
and of course the zombies would have morale so you can watch a bunch of zombies trying to run while their legs come lose and their rotten bodies disintegrate.
skeleton armies like out of sinbad. with sword and shield.
these ideas should definetly make mtw2 more historically i think:yes:
Does this seem like 4 alexanders bundled into 1 xpac to anyone else?
to me it seems like 4 great campaigns and one great expansion.
Sounds like a tagline; "Four Thrilling Campaigns in One Epic Expansion Pack!!!"Quote:
Originally Posted by King of Kings
The aspect of this that I'm really encouraged by is the size of the campaign maps. We're now getting 4 completely new maps of regions that have far more detail than most modders have been able to achieve. Even though it looks like there are only a few factions in each campaign, there's no reason why modders can't easily alter that and make each individual campaign into a massive game of its own. For instance, the British Isles map appears to only have 4 factions, but is easily large enough to support 15. That alone makes it a gold mine for the modding groups.
Just you wait until some mods are actually released. Most of what we have right now is rebalancing vanilla, really (although that in itself is often a very good achievement).Quote:
Originally Posted by TinCow
Anyways, maybe CA will put those features into the grand campaign with a patch for the original game, or they simply didn't work on it until the version Gamestar got. If I'd make an expansion I'd try to get the expansion content right before adding stuff to the original game, too...
(Gasp of Anticipation)...No.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monarch
I never played Alexander because it just looked like they were not making it to enhance gameplay experience, as it looked uninspired.
These, hower, look inspired, imaginative and made for the sole purpose of a more enjoyable gaming experience.
Does anybody know?
This reinforcing army feature they are talking about. What is the best info on how they are implementing this. Are we really finally going to be able to toggle between two full stack armies in one battle?
This info posted by Caliban at TWC is the best we've got to work on:
Quote:
The Control multiple armies feature is extremely cool. This lets you send orders to the generals of the reinforcement armies to carry out commands. You can select the armies via the 'army tabs'. I was watching Palamedes control 6 reinforcement armies in a siege battle last week! Very cool stuff.
It sounds really promising. So there is no info on troop limitations yet.
Threads merged. Please keep all expansion discussion in this thread.
Of the scenarios: three made sense, but the British Isles one surprised me a little. I would have thought an Iberian Peninsula scenario or a British Isle plus France scenario would have been a better go.
So... most of the new content is only accessible in the 4 minicampaigns?
Honestly, doesn't sound like much of an expansion. Would be better suited as downloadable content.
If I were to buy this expansion, and I'm not terribly thrilled by it so far, it wouldnt be so much because of what CA did but more like what the modders can do with it. I'm of the opinion nowadays that CA makes a okay game but the modders can make it a good game.
I'm just wondering how much they'll charge for it. :book:
Prob around half the originals cost.
i would much rather have CA make a good game than have modders make a game that may have bugs that screw up a good game
The thing is though is that its the modders who so far got alot of the fixes for the original game and made it playably enjoyable. M2TW should never had so many obvious bugs at launch. No excuse for it and I dont care if its CA's doing or Sega's(there seems to be an argument over who was responsible for pushing it out too soon). It was BS for it to launch so buggy like that. Its the modders who fixed alot of the bugs before CA ever got the first patch out. My respect for the modders grows with each new game CA releases.Quote:
Originally Posted by gibsonsg91921
I'm not trying to sound nasty towards CA because I do like their games but its just how I personally feel about their lack of QA lately.
Has anything been said here about whether or not it would be possible that we would be able to get the heir selection option back in the expansion?
No mention of it but Im willing to bet "no".Quote:
Originally Posted by Frederick_I_Barbarossa
Everyone together now...
:furious3: *UGH*:furious3:
I'm really missing that feature...and as far as the claim of historical accuracy on it...I can easily wikipedia a dozen instances where the eldest son did NOT inherit the throne...even Charlemagne didn't initially inherit the whole Frankish kingdom at first...
i would prefer if it was just legit primogeniture with the throne going to the kings son, or if the king had no sons to his brother, or if he had no brothers his uncle, and no uncles the closest, oldest male heir
Yeah, well, a very good deal of us don't want the current method. The best solution that's win-win would be to give us the ability to set the heir, and if you don't want to do that, just let the game handle it. The game would follow primogeniture (sp?) rules unless you jump in and manually set someone.
Everybody wins. Everybody's happy. Group hug. ~:grouphug:
(Captain Picard voice)
Make it so, CA.
this here expansion kinda makes me nervous:sweatdrop:
There's plenty of times in Medieval II when the eldest son doesn't inherit the throne... More often than not, it's the worst perverted drunkard in the family that gets to be king. Yeesh...Quote:
Originally Posted by Frederick_I_Barbarossa
Latest on the Total War blog: http://www.totalwarblog.com/
It seems to suggest that the hero abilities are less "WoW"-ish than previously thought. I think the explanation for the Byzantine emperor's confusion ability-- that the unit is bribed to be an undisciplined liability-- is a bit contrived, but not unbelievable.
http://www.gamespot.com/pages/news/s...s&subj=6168368Quote:
Kingdoms also offers new multiplayer maps and hotseat multiplayer, a first for the Total War series, allowing players to play one-versus-one campaign games on the same computer.
(3rd comment down after the article)
Huh?!
Hah! Hotseat games. They are slowly moving up in the world though. Soon they might add multiplayer campaigns. Maybe an fps approach to it heh.
I can't sit back and not have my two cents worth.
The Britannia campaign looks damn sexy. It will really show what the new Norman overlords of England had to struggle against to secure their kingdom. Should be fun, but I'd still like to see a mod exclusively on this (ie. the British Isles being the whole map). Would be interesting to see a scando-celtic faction spring up in northern Scotland - as did happen, the Clan Gunn (from whom I happen to directly descend) sprang out of nowhere and raided and killed lots of Scots. Damned Keith's!
The Crusades campaign will be a major improvement. It was not nearly covered enough. It just didn't cut the mustard. The Holy Kingdom of Jerusalem will have an odd assortment of units (and they better bloody be included!) and should be interesting - but difficult - to play as. They will have a real hard time fighting off the Muslims and dealing with civil unrest (but should have very low-upkeep units).
The Teutonic campaign is something I'm looking forward to. This campaign should be more about religion than even the Crusades campaign. I'm happy to see Lithuania in there, too. I thought they would have been mentioned in the original game (not just couple of units used by Poland). The Teutonic knights appear to be covered well.
American campaign? They always look good and turn out horrid and unrealistic. So many games have tried to encompass the conquest of the Americas while trying to retain some sort of realism; but it's never been done and it looks doubtful that it ever will be done justice. The Native American factions were (almost) never organized into battles. It was nearly exclusively guerrilla warfare. Anyway, I'm not going to lecture on this.
Overall, I'll buy it asap, and it should give me something to waste my spare time on for a few months. It looks classy but more fantastic than the original game. It would be cool if they make a Viking Expansion next...
I loved VI. :P
-Max
Simply not true. There were a number of battles, not only in Mexico, but also in the Yucatan and in Guatemala.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyar Karhunkynsi
The Spaniards fought a number of battles against the Tlaxcaltecas, then in conjunction with the Tlaxcaltecas against the Aztecs - the siege of Tenochtitlan, la Noche Triste, Otumba, Tlacopan. And these are only the large ones, far larger than almost any battle fought in Europe to that point.
Later, Pedro de Alvarado faced 72,000 (no doubt an exaggeration, but assuredly a large force nonetheless) Quiche Maya led by Tecun Uman near Quetzaltenango. He also had to storm the capitals of the Tzutujil, Mams, and Pokomams. The Pipils, under Atlacatl, even managed to drive Alvardo out of their territory in El Salvador.
In the Yucatan, the elder Francisco de Montejo failed to subdue the Maya despite a number of pitched battles. The younger Montejo fought a pitched battle as late as 1546 to finally end large-scale military resistance.
Also, there was plenty of fighting between the various Native polities long before Cortes showed up. The list of factions would seem to offer the opportunity to recreate the regular warfare between Aztecs and Tlaxcalecas, for instance.
Good post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyar Karhunkynsi
Personally I would defintely not qualify M2:TW as historically accurate. It's just a RTS game. There's no real history lesson IMO. It's vaguely based on history. When MTW/VI was launched I was all into the history, but the more history I read the more I realised what nonsense MTW was, historically speaking. That is, if you believe the historians, which is the only source of info we have anyway.
It's a GREAT game and a GREAT series. However it does not in any way offer an accurate picture of what happened in history.
The features look cool, but because of the way the patching has gone on the original M:TW2, I will wait a while before spending money. Why spend money at the premium price just to have to wait until the show stopping bugs are fixed?
The only good thing to come out of the press release is that now we know why CA is so slow to fix the bugs on the original game - they are too busy working on the expansion. :furious3: So perhaps the developers are techincally competent but the management is not allocating resources correctly...
Yes shortcuts have been made, factions have been simplified (for example, Seljuks/Ottomans, Almoghuvars/Almohads), histories streamlined - I still think all in all its probably the most accurate AND challenging game I've ever played - and that goes for the whole series from Shogun. Its the only reason I upgrade my computer!!
If some mucking around with history hadn't happened - we'd just be recreating history - rather than re-writing it.
I'm waiting with baited breath both for the patch and for the expansion. Both RTW Barbarian Invasions and MTW Viking Invasions were worthy expansions to the original - and I like the idea particularly of the British Isles, so I can rewrite history and have one of the three celtic factions showing those Sassenachs who the real Britons are!
One criticism - in MTW you could have civil wars. I'm yet to have a rebellion - let alone civil war. This is on VH/VH - will this come back into play with the expansion?
On another note - this labelling of supporters of MTW2 as fanboys is patently childish and smacks of idle flamers with no wit :dizzy2: ....nor real argument.
This is not a sarcastic post.
Fanboy means someone who is oblivious and blind to the shortcomings of the game. A fanboy supports the developers and the game blindly, without making any constructive and challenging remarks and critique. The only thing that ever come out of the fanboy are positive supportive comments. So even if someone comes out and says hey !! look why are the 2 handed units not doing anything. The fanboy comes and says well they are just look again, or maybe you don't know how to click, try right clicking. Why don't you just quit playing the game if you don't like it ? This is typical fanboy attitude.
Blind faith is always ... blind.
I LOVE and SUPPORT the series and CA since Shogun and I'm sure my contributions through stern and direct critique have been just as valuable as the times I've said GOOD FREAKIN JOB ! I LOVE IT !
Not all M2TW supporters are labelled fanboys but those who are so in love that they cannot see the faults often are. The word is also very often just used to put down and belittle.
Anyway I'm hoping to see lots of Native Americans with feathers and face paint in the expansion !
Wonder if they'll go as far west as Arizona, apparently there's gonna be Apache so I guess they'll have to. Can you just picture how beautiful the scenery will be, if it's anything like the current game. It will be AWESOME ! I also can't wait to see Apache in cantabrian circle... that's going to be AWESOME. Imagine if they have rifles AND tomahawks as secondary weapon. I hope they will be a playable faction. Wonder who the leaders will be and their special abilities. Can't wait to command Geronimo and his RAGING braves !
I also wonder how Saladin will be portrayed in the Crusades, if he will actually make an impression. In M2:TW I have'nt really noticed him though he must be there, somewhere. I have'nt played the Egyptians either so I would'nt know. Wonder if he will be well portrayed and what his special ability will be. I'm sure loads of people (like me) just can't wait to command him and his chivalrous warriors !
Salute !
PC Gamer Uk had a six page preview (mostly screenshots of the Lithuanian and Americas campaigns).
Heres a short summary of stuff that I dont think has been mentioned before
Some of the New Units:
Scythe wielding followers of Perkunas
Dieva Guards (calvary with warforks)
Iqta'dar
Priests of Quetzalcoatl
Szlachta
Rhyfelwyr
Sacthwyr
Ulster Swordsmen
Calievermen (Irish Harquebusiers)
Features in Americas Campaign:
Expeditionary forces can arrive from England, etc
New Prestige System
Reinforcements get sent from Spain (related to Prestige system I think)
British Isles:
English can send Edward on Crusade. If successful comes back with veteran knights and new traits, failure means he dies and you'll have to do without him.
Welsh get spontanious sympathies (extra manpower for welsh generals in border regions).
I got the impression that the permanent, moated Forts were limited to the this campaign.
For All Campaigns:Possibilityof new agent types (such as the Explorer in Americas).
This looks very fun, indeed. I wish I had it now. I also agree with at least one of the posters that taking over a specific area i.e. all Britain or the Holy Land is a much more realistic goal to be set for the Middle Ages than trying to conquer the entire world.
I just hope/wish that factions like Wales and Ireland would enter into the grand campaign since these countries were actually existent. (granted very divided at the time)
what in the world is that thing on the cover of the magazine? is that actually one of the units in the expansion?
Interesting info, thanks for posting it. New agent types sounds very promising. The new units sound interesting too, although I was sure Szlachta were already in the game for some reason. And I think Sacthwyr should be Saethwyr or something like that. :book:Quote:
Originally Posted by Taliferno
Antagonist
EDIT: Have to say though, "Ulster Swordsmen" is quite an annoying name in comparison to the others.
Makes me think of the Tain or something.
I'm gonna guess that the Ulster swordsmen are sort of an anglo/Irish men at arms type unit, seeing as at the start of the campaign most of Ulster would be under Norman control. Historically in the 1500s the name for the able bodied men of Ulster was 'the swordsmen' so swordsmen amongst their armies was obviously quite common.
I also forgot to post about how the controllable reinforcements work, so here it is:
-A new UI element appears on the side of the battle screen.
-this allows you to assign behaviours to reinforcemnets (aggressive/defensive/shootout and give them destinations
-You cant micromanage every unit (but we already knew that).
and your right Antagonist it is Saethwyr, I mistyped it in.
I do see where you're coming from, I really do.Quote:
Originally Posted by MilesGregarius
But the fact of the matter remains, the majority of the European invader/settlers were not, in fact, killed in battle but by wonderfully sneaky guerrilla warfare. There were battles, aye, big ones at that - but if you were trying to show any half-decent portrayal of the invasion of the America's the M2TW game is not the place to do it. How could you possibly show a skirmish or raid? Men were picked off by enemy, environment and disease - not just a "line up and hack away" battle. I do not have a bias. I see it from a different perspective to anyone who can say "my great-great-granddaddy..." in regard to the Americas. I assume you do?
I'm aware. It's a game and I do not expect realistic content (well, some - but not a lot). The entire TW style of play does not allow for much realism. "Line up and hack away" does no accurately show much of anything. Events were happening on a communal and provincial level during wartime that cannot hope to be shown in the near future. The TW games I play are a way for me to waste my time in a way that I deem relaxing (I like to see little men being hacked down - it's oddly soothing). But hey, it beats FPS.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinan
:medievalcheers:
I mean no offense by any of this.
Cheers,
Max
Uhm, if you check around the big mods for MTW and RTW, you'll see that they are more bug free than the original game.Quote:
Originally Posted by gibsonsg91921
The same can be said for much of Europe until at least the Renaissance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boyar Karhunkynsi
Ireland, for example, saw few pitched battles of the type you say Mesoamerica lacked, yet remained in constant turmoil for centuries, essentially a millenium of skirmish and raid, and the same can be said to a lesser degree of much of the Norman Conquest and and English attempts to subdue Wales and Scotland. Neither M2TW nor VI successfully models this, and I doubt that Kingdoms will either. And it is far more absurd to imagine an Irish or Welsh faction conquering and uniting the whole of the British Isles than it is to imagine an Aztec leader crushing Cortez's little expeditionary force.
Similarly, much, if not most, of the fighting between the Teutonic Order and the Lithuanian pagans they crusaded against consisted of little more than raid and counter-raid. Where in the game's current incarnation can we recreate the slave raids and the village burning which no doubt claimed far more lives than at Liegnitz or Tannenberg?
In RTW, Caesar's men spent far more time burning villages and warding of ambushes in Gaul than they did standing toe-to-toe with any Gallic armies. The Aztecs, Tlaxcalans, Tarascans, Zapotecs, et al were at least unified polities. A unified Gaul? Laughable. The TW series is simply not scaled to represent guerrilla tactics in any place or in any time period.
Finally, the single most significant occurence, and greatest cause of casualties, in the Europe of the M2TW period, the Black Death, is not represented in the game. If more Europeans died due to the plague than in all the dynastic wars and crusades combined, how can you say the M2TW as it stands now is any more representative than a conquest of Mexico scenario?
This seems counter to your point about the Americas' campaign. If you "do not expect realistic content (well, some - but not a lot)" regarding European campaigns, how do you deem an Americas' campaign insufficiently realistic?Quote:
I'm aware. It's a game and I do not expect realistic content (well, some - but not a lot). The entire TW style of play does not allow for much realism. "Line up and hack away" does no accurately show much of anything. Events were happening on a communal and provincial level during wartime that cannot hope to be shown in the near future. The TW games I play are a way for me to waste my time in a way that I deem relaxing (I like to see little men being hacked down - it's oddly soothing). But hey, it beats FPS.
:medievalcheers:
I mean no offense by any of this.
Cheers,
Max
If I have any (MILD) complaint with the campaign selections in Kingdoms, it's with yet another rehash of the conquest of the Britiain. The Reconquista or the era of the condottiere in Italy would have made for fresher subject matter.
The black death is ingame, it's freakin lethal when it arrives.Quote:
Finally, the single most significant occurence, and greatest cause of casualties, in the Europe of the M2TW period, the Black Death, is not represented in the game.
When does it arrive, anyway?
I don't think I've ever still been playing (definitely never seen the unlocking of the new world, so if it's after that....) when it comes around
It arrives in 1346 in Southern Europe first.
The black death is probably the most terrifying thing in the game.
Not even power of the mongols or Timurids can match the destructive power of that plague.
Ruins your economy and gets you into a deficit just with 2-3 turns and wipes out most of your family.
Anyway, reading the gamespot preview made me very interested in the Teutonic campaign.
The recruitment method for the order sounds cool.
Sorry. I only play short campaigns.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lusted
And Lusted, absolutely love LTC. It's the main reason I'm content to wait until whenever for 1.2 to finally show.
Is it at all possible that NEW elements will come into the game? moats fair enough, and flame thrower... those will be great new dimensions and hopefully summit to mod. But will we get an increase on 31 factions? Will we get a higher unit limit? Without these things, the four mini campaign system just seems a way of giving limited pleasure which won't enter the grand campaign, it won't really revolutionise the engine and allow us to make a decent game out of it
And as stated little things like setting the faction heir or princesses/queens inheriting, leading armies, remarrying and so on just seem to be ignored. The dispatching and acquisition of titles as governor, bishop etc that existed in MTW is totally needed here too... will we get it? Do they care if they can blind us with other nice sounding things in the PR package and flashy advertising. Once we've bought the game...they won't care...but we will...
PC Gamer UK have a four day report on the expansion pack on their site.
Here is day one and the links to the next three are on the right hand side: http://www.computerandvideogames.com....php?id=161675
i hope they let yu play the english on the americas campaign. the english expeditionary force?
I like the look of the castle/forts which are shown in the Britannia screen shot and look like they are unmanned. I'd like to see a screen shot of a battle involving them just to see what they really look like.
PC GAMER "In fact, that's one of the major issues with Medieval 2: the sheer scale of the game. Campaigns demand months of your time, and much of the end-game is sheer grind to clinch those final few provinces. That's where Kingdom's four new mini-campaigns come in. "
told u so, this is going to be VERY acrade, the mini campaigns will be over in an hour or SHOULD be, they will not offer anything to hardened players...if we can get some good modding out of it remains to be seen
Have you seen the amount of provinces in the mini-campaigns, there are about 50 provinces on each map. You won't be able to beat that in an hour. I doubt they'll be arcady, just smaller more focused camapigns that can be played quicker. I mean i've never finished a campaign in M2TW(only finished one in MTw and RTW), but i think i might in Kingdoms.
They will hardly be "arcadey". It's the same game you're playing. It's Medieval 2 in more focused bite sized chunks which is a great thing in my opinion. I can't always be bothered conquering (or trying to) all of Europe. Sometimes I want a nice little campaign that I can focus on over the course of a week or two. It definately won't be over in an hour that's for sure.
EDIT: Hell some of my battles take a good half hour.